Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2007 3:54:29 GMT -5

The debate of if sexual abuse within 2x2ism is 'much' or if it is 'little' doesn't seem to reach a conclusion. Not so surprising when these terms of measurement are so open to individual values of seriousness. Non-involved supporters of the system seem to feel the rate is acceptable -- others (including victims) understandably push for acknowledgment of the problem, and push for leadership policy change in the interests of the hundreds of vulnerable folks still in danger.

The fact that new issues seem to pop up, and spread via the Internet all the time does make it a issue that cannot be swept under the rug with the same ease as has historically been done. Some 2x2ers swear that present leadership DOES take the problem seriously -- and that they HAVE made changes in policy.

Yet in my home city in Saskatchewan there is a perfect fairly recent example of an ex-worker clearly involved in sex-abuse of minors, that has been given full support (including full secrecy of the ugly happenings surrounding his exit from the work) by the senior workers involved -- and he has even been entrusted by 'the work' with responsibility for youth unaware of his previous problems.

This doesn't speak of policy change -- it is a very well recognizable policy that 2x2 leadership has followed since I can remember. Some people think it is OK -- don't even regard it as a problem. Some people (even 2x2ers) find it offensive.

Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2007 7:34:44 GMT -5

One victim is far too many victims. I think most 2x2s would agree with that Edgar.

Where the disagreement lies is in how to handle these things. Workers today will insist that they have "taken care" of all known sexually-oriented problems in the ministry, and this insistence would extend throughout the Western alliance territory. "Taken care of" means "dismissed from the work" and most onlookers will disagree that this sufficient due diligence. Society is coalescing around the idea that "taken care of" means reporting to authorities and let it unfold from there. Some extremists will want a metaphoric public flogging and anything less means "sweeping under the carpet'', however, that is not where mainstream society is going.....yet anyway. The closest thing to public flogging is a trial, conviction, jail and being named on a sexual offender registry.

How the church should handle these people beyond reporting to the authorities is another matter. Personally, I strongly lean toward a merciful approach if the offender is going through, or has gone through the legal system. Being merciful doesn't mean being stupid though. Anyone with this kind of background should never have opportunity to get familiar with children in the church (or anywhere else imo). I don't know what Edgar is talking about with the case he mentioned being allowed access to children, but if true, it sounds like an egregious error by the workers there no matter how merciful or compassionate they may appear to be.

Selective mercy is a real problem in the church. Some people get a very rough ride over minor issues, or for mistakes which have no victims while others who have destroyed children or adults get a free pass. From my experience, a lot of injustice and uneven treatment has to do with the offender's devotion to the workers. Show great devotion to the workers and you get a free pass under most circumstances.

The other factor in selective mercy is in the knowledge of the offender. Some offenders will have knowledge of skeletons in the closet of others. Depending on how they play their cards, they will get either an extreme rough treatment or the kid glove treatment. Politics is often a factor.

Post by Admin on Oct 10, 2007 7:36:58 GMT -5

rjkee said:

In my own case, my dad deeply regretted the fact the he did not report [deleted] abuse to the police. He explained to me that when the matter was reported to the workers, he assumed that they would hold their internal enquiry to establish the facts about the allegations, and when confirmed, they would report [deleted] to the police. He was astounded when they immediately moved him to Dublin in the Irish Republic, in order to get him out of the British jurisdiction. Another victim's dad was a police detective - his instinct was to report [deleted] immediately when his son made the allegations. My dad preferred to 'lay hands suddenly on no man', and persuaded him to wait until after the internal enquiry. I guess that the workers moved [deleted] to the Irish Republic as they suspected the police detective was about to take action.

Robert, I have removed the name of the abuser that you name in your post. I am sorry that I have had to do this, in order to comply with the ProBoards rules on libel for their boards. If I have erred on the side of caution, for that I apologize. I do not know if this abuser is still alive. We value your input on this terrible subject, and hold you in our hearts!

AdminBy this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.

Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2007 7:48:44 GMT -5

Robert, yes, the laws in some US states are now clear and unequivocal. Some laws now state that there should be nothing that should delay reporting. No discussion, no internal investigation, etc. You receive an accusation by a victim or his/her parents, you report, no fudging around otherwise you are subject to a charge for a criminal offense yourself.

I think most of us have been where your dad was, trusting that the workers would be interested in the truth and understanding the importance of justice being done in a criminal matter. It's sad that the system has encouraged a worker-worship attitude. Just this week someone who has been professing for many decades told/asked me, "when the workers tell us to do something, then we have to do it right?" This is frightening stuff, it sends shivers down my spine.

rjkee said:

Clearday wrote:

clearday said:

rational said:

There should be little, if any, investigation by the ministry. The reasons are simple. First, the ministry has many vested interests including the interest in protecting their own colleagues and the reputation of their ministry group and church overall. Because of these vested interests, they are the worst group to get involved in it. Secondly, the authorities have investigative skills that no one in the church has. This is particularly important with children as it takes special training and skills to properly interview an alleged child victim to determine the truth and get the "proof".

The lack of both investigative skills and the problem of vested interests make the overseers completely inadequate for involvement.

I agree 100%.

In my own case, my dad deeply regretted the fact the he did not report [deleted] abuse to the police. He explained to me that when the matter was reported to the workers, he assumed that they would hold their internal enquiry to establish the facts about the allegations, and when confirmed, they would report [deleted] to the police. He was astounded when they immediately moved him to Dublin in the Irish Republic, in order to get him out of the British jurisdiction. Another victim's dad was a police detective - his instinct was to report [deleted] immediately when his son made the allegations. My dad preferred to 'lay hands suddenly on no man', and persuaded him to wait until after the internal enquiry. I guess that the workers moved [deleted] to the Irish Republic as they suspected the police detective was about to take action.

To his credit, the overseer at the time, Willie Wilkin, acknowledged on his death bed that they had made a dreadful mistake. However, to this day, his successors have taken no action to redress the situation.

Post by wingsofaneagle on Oct 10, 2007 7:59:29 GMT -5

admin said:

rjkee said:

In my own case, my dad deeply regretted the fact the he did not report [deleted] abuse to the police. He explained to me that when the matter was reported to the workers, he assumed that they would hold their internal enquiry to establish the facts about the allegations, and when confirmed, they would report [deleted] to the police. He was astounded when they immediately moved him to Dublin in the Irish Republic, in order to get him out of the British jurisdiction. Another victim's dad was a police detective - his instinct was to report [deleted] immediately when his son made the allegations. My dad preferred to 'lay hands suddenly on no man', and persuaded him to wait until after the internal enquiry. I guess that the workers moved [deleted] to the Irish Republic as they suspected the police detective was about to take action.

Robert, I have removed the name of the abuser that you name in your post. I am sorry that I have had to do this, in order to comply with the ProBoards rules on libel for their boards. If I have erred on the side of caution, for that I apologize. I do not know if this abuser is still alive. We value your input on this terrible subject, and hold you in our hearts!

Why remove the name of Robert's abuser when he is a convicted pedophile who has done time for molesting boys???

Post by Scott Ross on Oct 10, 2007 8:03:17 GMT -5

Howdy,

Clearday, in regards to:

I don't know what Edgar is talking about with the case he mentioned being allowed access to children, but if true, it sounds like an egregious error by the workers there no matter how merciful or compassionate they may appear to be.

This ex worker in question brought a young boy to a gospel meeting. A very upset mother of young children who knew of this workers past history asked the sister workers in her field what they were thinking to allow (him) to be responsible for bringing a young boy to gospel meeting. After a somewhat abashed pause and stumbling around, one said that he was okay now and had counseling....and then that it wasn't their decision....

Post by Admin on Oct 10, 2007 8:10:26 GMT -5

wingsofaneagle said:

Why remove the name of Robert's abuser when he is a convicted pedophile who has done time for molesting boys???

I am sorry "wings" I didn't know that. Robert stated "However, to this day, his successors have taken no action to redress the situation" which didn't suggest to me that the abuser had faced legal judgment.

I would imagine ProBoards (should they look) would equally be in the dark.

AdminBy this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.

Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2007 8:59:37 GMT -5

bescottross said:

Howdy,

Clearday, in regards to:

I don't know what Edgar is talking about with the case he mentioned being allowed access to children, but if true, it sounds like an egregious error by the workers there no matter how merciful or compassionate they may appear to be.

This ex worker in question brought a young boy to a gospel meeting. A very upset mother of young children who knew of this workers past history asked the sister workers in her field what they were thinking to allow (him) to be responsible for bringing a young boy to gospel meeting. After a somewhat abashed pause and stumbling around, one said that he was okay now and had counseling....and then that it wasn't their decision....

Scott

Thanks Scott. Sounds to me like this man is not "ok now", in fact quite the contrary. Anyone who has been determined to have molested someone and later turns up with a young boy in tow, ostensibly to "help" him, is likely still doing his dirty deeds and is not cured. A rational and cured molester would steer clear of underaged children for the rest of his life. The fact is, these people are rarely cured and being in the company of children is the first sign of more molesting.

That being said, I'm not sure what the workers are supposed to do. They could insist that he not bring the boy to gospel meetings, thereby forcing the alleged molester into the underground for his activities, which could make it worse for the boy and others. The other side of the argument is that if the man is continuing to molest, he will be using the meetings to establish his legitimacy in the eyes of his victim. That is, if he proves to the victim that he is a holy man, the victim will be more pliable. Removing the meeting option would remove the legitmacy ploy from the man. They could insist that if the young boy is indeed interested in the meetings, that other friends get involved and bring him to the meeting separate from the alleged offender.

I personally know an incurable child sex offender. When he was still on the loose, he used to take the same approach with some of his victims, ostensibly trying to "help" them come to Christ.

Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2007 9:14:43 GMT -5

bescottross said:

Howdy,

Clearday, in regards to:

I don't know what Edgar is talking about with the case he mentioned being allowed access to children, but if true, it sounds like an egregious error by the workers there no matter how merciful or compassionate they may appear to be.

This ex worker in question brought a young boy to a gospel meeting. A very upset mother of young children who knew of this workers past history asked the sister workers in her field what they were thinking to allow (him) to be responsible for bringing a young boy to gospel meeting. After a somewhat abashed pause and stumbling around, one said that he was okay now and had counseling....and then that it wasn't their decision....

Scott

The interesting and horrible thing is that in spite of the unsuitableness of the situation being directly pointed out to the workers --- most of the friends are still kept completely in the dark as to what the risks are. Seeing the workers have openly given the friends the impression of complete trust in this fellow and carefully avoided any explanation as to why he has left the work, many of the friends still choose to disbelieve the 'gossipers' that would suggest that anyone in the work could have done anything unsuitable. This leaves their familys completely vulnerable.

Post by las logged out on Oct 10, 2007 12:27:25 GMT -5

edgarmassey said:

bescottross said:

Howdy,

Clearday, in regards to:

I don't know what Edgar is talking about with the case he mentioned being allowed access to children, but if true, it sounds like an egregious error by the workers there no matter how merciful or compassionate they may appear to be.

This ex worker in question brought a young boy to a gospel meeting. A very upset mother of young children who knew of this workers past history asked the sister workers in her field what they were thinking to allow (him) to be responsible for bringing a young boy to gospel meeting. After a somewhat abashed pause and stumbling around, one said that he was okay now and had counseling....and then that it wasn't their decision....

Scott

The interesting and horrible thing is that in spite of the unsuitableness of the situation being directly pointed out to the workers --- most of the friends are still kept completely in the dark as to what the risks are. Seeing the workers have openly given the friends the impression of complete trust in this fellow and carefully avoided any explanation as to why he has left the work, many of the friends still choose to disbelieve the 'gossipers' that would suggest that anyone in the work could have done anything unsuitable. This leaves their familys completely vulnerable.

Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2007 13:00:06 GMT -5

When they don't have a choice (like in Minnesota) they can step up to the plate -- In the interests of the families of the friends it is worth making a fuss to make it happen. No minor should have to deal with that kind of issue.

Post by wingsofaneagle on Oct 10, 2007 13:59:10 GMT -5

admin said:

wingsofaneagle said:

Why remove the name of Robert's abuser when he is a convicted pedophile who has done time for molesting boys???

I am sorry "wings" I didn't know that. Robert stated "However, to this day, his successors have taken no action to redress the situation" which didn't suggest to me that the abuser had faced legal judgment.

I would imagine ProBoards (should they look) would equally be in the dark.

NT was convicted for molesting boys outside of the F&W after he abused Robert. Charges have not been brought against him for the boys he abused while in the work. He is still a convicted felon however. He did his time and is now married to a professing girl and lives in the Cork area I believe.

Robert, do you remember the newspaper article in the paper in Cork or Waterford when he was sentenced? I remember reading it a long time ago. Do you have a copy of that to post?

Post by LSMND on Oct 10, 2007 18:02:38 GMT -5

NT was convicted for molesting boys outside of the F&W after he abused Robert. Charges have not been brought against him for the boys he abused while in the work. He is still a convicted felon however. He did his time and is now married to a professing girl and lives in the Cork area I believe.

Robert, do you remember the newspaper article in the paper in Cork or Waterford when he was sentenced? I remember reading it a long time ago. Do you have a copy of that to post?[/quote]

NT's wife was a former nun who professed a number of years ago and the only Sunday morning meeting to which she was accepted was one where I understand a cousin of NT's was the elder. The woman was treated with distrust by all in the area, many thinking that NT had encouraged her to become part of the fellowship in order that he could return "through the back door" so to speak. It was a dashed hope as he was not accepted back and now his wife no longer attends the meetings. NT apparently did go to a mission in Cork recently but was told that he must under no circumstances "set foot on any property where there are meetings taking place". ( I quote a friend who has endless reliable sources.)

For what it is worth, Mr. Kee's case is still discussed from time to time amongst the fellowship and the view appears to be that all consider the case badly handled and while there is the understanding that it was a crime of which most people had little or knowledge or experience at the time, it should have been dealt with more effectively. This of course does not make Mr. Kee's situation any more tolerable but I want him to know that symapthies are entirely with him and his family and not NT.

Post by Admin on Oct 10, 2007 18:30:59 GMT -5

wingsofaneagle said:

NT was convicted for molesting boys outside of the F&W after he abused Robert. Charges have not been brought against him for the boys he abused while in the work. He is still a convicted felon however. He did his time and is now married to a professing girl and lives in the Cork area I believe.

Robert, do you remember the newspaper article in the paper in Cork or Waterford when he was sentenced? I remember reading it a long time ago. Do you have a copy of that to post?

This board will never be involved in covering up for convicted paedophiles, at least not while I've got anything to do with it.

Robert's reference to the newspaper articles states in part:

In January 1991, Noel Tanner was again convicted for sexual offences against adolescent boys. At this time, the following article appeared in the Cork Examiner newspaper.

Fined for act of indecency

A man was fined £50 by Justice B. J. Carroll at Fermoy Court yesterday for committing an act of gross indecency with a male person at Pike Road, Ballinamona, Fermoy, on June 8, 1988.

Robert Noel Tanner, Crush, Glanmire was also disqualified from holding a driving licence for two years in view of the fact that a vehicle was used in the commission of the offence.

He also admitted two other similar charges involving a 13 1/2 -year-old male, and two further charges of indecently assaulting the same person.

This is the more poignant because one of our valued and beloved members of TMB was one of the victims.

"Wings" while I am many things, omniscient is not one of them. As it states in the header, my policy is to err on the side of caution in instances of potential libel. Also that "you are our eyes and ears" so please continue to inform me of facts as you understand them.

And this way, we will tread well the fine line between complying with ProBoards requirements while not covering for proven offenders, and most importantly, doing all in our power to keep children safe. Thank you.

AdminBy this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.

Post by wingsofaneagle on Oct 10, 2007 18:47:30 GMT -5

LSMND said:

NT was convicted for molesting boys outside of the F&W after he abused Robert. Charges have not been brought against him for the boys he abused while in the work. He is still a convicted felon however. He did his time and is now married to a professing girl and lives in the Cork area I believe.

Robert, do you remember the newspaper article in the paper in Cork or Waterford when he was sentenced? I remember reading it a long time ago. Do you have a copy of that to post?[/b

NT's wife was a former nun who professed a number of years ago and the only Sunday morning meeting to which she was accepted was one where I understand a cousin of NT's was the elder. The woman was treated with distrust by all in the area, many thinking that NT had encouraged her to become part of the fellowship in order that he could return "through the back door" so to speak. It was a dashed hope as he was not accepted back and now his wife no longer attends the meetings. NT apparently did go to a mission in Cork recently but was told that he must under no circumstances "set foot on any property where there are meetings taking place". ( I quote a friend who has endless reliable sources.)

For what it is worth, Mr. Kee's case is still discussed from time to time amongst the fellowship and the view appears to be that all consider the case badly handled and while there is the understanding that it was a crime of which most people had little or knowledge or experience at the time, it should have been dealt with more effectively. This of course does not make Mr. Kee's situation any more tolerable but I want him to know that symapthies are entirely with him and his family and not NT.

And for the record, I do not attend meetings.

Thanks for the update, thats great! I had heard he had done time in prison.... is that true?My brother was molested by him as well and is now an atheist because of it all. You mention a worker to him and he goes ballistic. So sad.

Post by wingsofaneagle on Oct 10, 2007 18:48:49 GMT -5

admin said:

wingsofaneagle said:

NT was convicted for molesting boys outside of the F&W after he abused Robert. Charges have not been brought against him for the boys he abused while in the work. He is still a convicted felon however. He did his time and is now married to a professing girl and lives in the Cork area I believe.

Robert, do you remember the newspaper article in the paper in Cork or Waterford when he was sentenced? I remember reading it a long time ago. Do you have a copy of that to post?

This board will never be involved in covering up for convicted paedophiles, at least not while I've got anything to do with it.

Robert's reference to the newspaper articles states in part:

In January 1991, Noel Tanner was again convicted for sexual offences against adolescent boys. At this time, the following article appeared in the Cork Examiner newspaper.

Fined for act of indecency

A man was fined £50 by Justice B. J. Carroll at Fermoy Court yesterday for committing an act of gross indecency with a male person at Pike Road, Ballinamona, Fermoy, on June 8, 1988.

Robert Noel Tanner, Crush, Glanmire was also disqualified from holding a driving licence for two years in view of the fact that a vehicle was used in the commission of the offence.

He also admitted two other similar charges involving a 13 1/2 -year-old male, and two further charges of indecently assaulting the same person.

This is the more poignant because one of our valued and beloved members of TMB was one of the victims.

"Wings" while I am many things, omniscient is not one of them. As it states in the header, my policy is to err on the side of caution in instances of potential libel. Also that "you are our eyes and ears" so please continue to inform me of facts as you understand them.

And this way, we will tread well the fine line between complying with ProBoards requirements while not covering for proven offenders, and most importantly, doing all in our power to keep children safe. Thank you.

Post by juliette on Oct 10, 2007 22:25:43 GMT -5

wingsofaneagle said:

LSMND said:

NT was convicted for molesting boys outside of the F&W after he abused Robert. Charges have not been brought against him for the boys he abused while in the work. He is still a convicted felon however. He did his time and is now married to a professing girl and lives in the Cork area I believe.

Robert, do you remember the newspaper article in the paper in Cork or Waterford when he was sentenced? I remember reading it a long time ago. Do you have a copy of that to post?[/b

NT's wife was a former nun who professed a number of years ago and the only Sunday morning meeting to which she was accepted was one where I understand a cousin of NT's was the elder. The woman was treated with distrust by all in the area, many thinking that NT had encouraged her to become part of the fellowship in order that he could return "through the back door" so to speak. It was a dashed hope as he was not accepted back and now his wife no longer attends the meetings. NT apparently did go to a mission in Cork recently but was told that he must under no circumstances "set foot on any property where there are meetings taking place". ( I quote a friend who has endless reliable sources.)

For what it is worth, Mr. Kee's case is still discussed from time to time amongst the fellowship and the view appears to be that all consider the case badly handled and while there is the understanding that it was a crime of which most people had little or knowledge or experience at the time, it should have been dealt with more effectively. This of course does not make Mr. Kee's situation any more tolerable but I want him to know that symapthies are entirely with him and his family and not NT.

And for the record, I do not attend meetings.

Thanks for the update, thats great! I had heard he had done time in prison.... is that true?My brother was molested by him as well and is now an atheist because of it all. You mention a worker to him and he goes ballistic. So sad.

Wings:

This was exactly one of my messages to Lyle when we met with him. Sexual abuse by a has effects not only on people physically, emotionally, psychologically, but also SPIRITUALLY! So those who are guilty of sexual assault AND THE COVER UP could be responsible for turning someone away from God. What a burden for all eternity! This is so much more true when the abuser is in a position of spiritual leadership or well-regarded by the fellowship.

Post by wingsofaneagle on Oct 10, 2007 22:38:24 GMT -5

You are so right Juli. Sexual abuse permeates into everything in our lives including our spirituality. The utmost responsibility a worker, or any "man of God" has is to take care of the spiritual well-being of their flock. I think its just ignorance really in not knowing just how devastating sexual abuse can be on an individual and especially if they have suffered at the hands oof someone they looked to for spiritual guidance. Hopefully, the workers will be enlightened/educated on these issues so they can be proactive instead of just reactive.

Post by rjkee on Oct 11, 2007 3:56:23 GMT -5

Hello,

In view of the curent interest in the subject of molestation and abuse by 2x2 workers, I have uploaded a number of documents relating to my discussions on this matter with the senior Irish workers. Please note that I have no hesitation in publishing the letter from Tommie Gamble, without his permission, as I know that he discussed my letters with 2x2 members. I have also uploaded copies of an apology I recently received from my abuser. The URLs are given below.

Post by caith on Oct 11, 2007 6:30:45 GMT -5

been reading your links RJK ... and this one brought back a memory.

"seen him in action, putting people on the spot in meetings by demanding testimonies, and humiliating others who had not taken part."

a Union Meeting ...When BrotherWorker stood up to give out the closing hymn he said that all those who hadn't taken part would stand for that hymn.I hadn't - so I stood.But I must confess I've never forgiven him for thereby making my father stand too (he hadn't "had a word" either).

some day I'll let go ... I seem able forgive people anything they do to me, but attack my parents/children and it's hard to take.

Post by rjkee on Oct 11, 2007 6:47:31 GMT -5

Hi Caith,

I'm quite proud of the fact that as a (approximately) 16 year old, when Walter Milligan asked those who had not 'spoken' in a Donegal union meeting, I did not stand up. I really resented his attempt to humiliate me. I suppose that by 16 I'd decided that I would not feel obliged to obey the workers. I was only concerned about my relationship with my parents and not too bothered about workers' opinion of me. Incidentally, my dad who was sitting beside me never commented on this incident. I suspect he agreed with my stance, but did not want to 'rock the boat'.

Post by rational on Oct 11, 2007 7:51:59 GMT -5

wingsofaneagle said:

Thanks for the update, thats great! I had heard he had done time in prison.... is that true?My brother was molested by him as well and is now an atheist because of it all. You mention a worker to him and he goes ballistic. So sad.

He became an atheist because of something that another human did?

I have no problem with atheists but the given reason does make me wonder.

Post by rational on Oct 11, 2007 8:42:59 GMT -5

"seen him in action, putting people on the spot in meetings by demanding testimonies, and humiliating others who had not taken part."

a Union Meeting ...When BrotherWorker stood up to give out the closing hymn he said that all those who hadn't taken part would stand for that hymn.I hadn't - so I stood.But I must confess I've never forgiven him for thereby making my father stand too (he hadn't "had a word" either).

some day I'll let go ... I seem able forgive people anything they do to me, but attack my parents/children and it's hard to take.

I hate to take the other side of this but couldn't this have been a way to allow people to essentially have the hymn be their testimony, letting them to take a full part in the meeting, without having to speak alone?

Instead of it being a punishment for not having taking part maybe it was a way to reach out and include those who had problems with public speaking.

As you might guess, I never had that problem but I have a feeling my parents were always a little on edge wondering what "gems" I would offer!

I do remember some interesting after dinner discussions, when the workers were there, that suddenly were cut short because it was "time to clean up"!

Post by jh62 on Oct 11, 2007 8:54:52 GMT -5

Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2007 9:49:57 GMT -5

Rational, without trying to assess "blame" regarding the loss of faith, I personally know a number of b&r people quite well who have a deathly allergy to God because of their treatment by the church, often at a young age. They are now sickened by anything to do with God including all churches, not just the 2x2 variety.

I think the explanation is that they were brought up to believe that the church and ministry were a proxy for God. So, it's an entirely rational reaction. "If God treats people this badly, I want nothing to do with him". I suppose the "blame" isn't so much in the poor behaviour of the church, but in the subtle teaching that it and the ministry is synonymous with God.

rational said:

wingsofaneagle said:

Thanks for the update, thats great! I had heard he had done time in prison.... is that true?My brother was molested by him as well and is now an atheist because of it all. You mention a worker to him and he goes ballistic. So sad.

He became an atheist because of something that another human did?

I have no problem with atheists but the given reason does make me wonder.

Shoutbox

wally: proboards can be a bit buggy...i still get virus warnings when clicking on thread links...Feb 26, 2020 22:04:28 GMT -5

ant_rotten: Does anyone else constantly have a pop up saying “do you want to download index.html” when using TMB desktop version? This happens to me both on my iPhone and iPad.. Feb 26, 2020 19:56:33 GMT -5

wally: you haven't asked me a question or anything or did i miss one?Feb 20, 2020 6:03:05 GMT -5